Fact Pattern 7-1
Prudence offered to sell her car to Danny for $3,000. Danny was not sure what to do, so
he asked Prudence if she would hold the offer open for him for one week for $50.
Prudence said sure, and the parties signed a contract to the effect that Prudence would
hold the car. A few hours later, Bobby unexpectedly offered Prudence $3,500 for the
car, and Prudence sold it to him on the spot. Danny decided to buy the car, but when he
came by to pick it up the next day, it was gone. Prudence gave Danny his $50 back
telling him that was her only obligation and that if he had any complaints, he could take
it up with Bobby. Danny found a similar car the next week for $3,500 and purchased it.
Refer to Fact Pattern 7-1. Did Danny have any type of contract with Prudence, and if so
what type?
a. Danny did not have any type of contract with Prudence.
b. Danny had an option contract with Prudence.
c. Danny had a hold contract with Prudence.
d. Danny had a conditional contract with Prudence.
Answer:
In the Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals, Inc. case discussed in the text, plaintiffs sued
the defendant Canadian corporation in a United States court, regarding an order under
CERCLA pertaining to its contamination of water in Canada that reached the U.S. Was
the Canadian corporation subject to the courts of the United States?
a. The court ruled that the defendant lacked the minimum contacts necessary to require
it to submit to the jurisdiction of a U.S. court.
b. The court ruled that subject matter jurisdiction did not exist.
c. The court ruled that the defendant was subject to jurisdiction in the U.S. court.